New Mars Forums

Void

Member

Registered: 2011-12-29

Posts: 7,814

Re: US public opposed to spending money on human Mars missions

The actual limits for this topic apparently are:

Space Policy [ New posts ]

Light political discussion relevant to Mars exploration and space; outreach to politicians in the US and worldwide. Refrain from general politics.

Also from:
Index
» Interplanetary transportation
» Moon Detour, Ballistic Capture, Perhaps also Semi-Cyclers

OK, yes, you can do gravitational fly by's , you can do some orbital maneuvers, it is also possible to drop water ice onto the Moon, and recover a large amount of it.

But what value/cost to a Mars mission?

Really, the more important question should be what are reasonable values? 

I might say "If I had asteroid mining, I might be able to use it to help a mission to Mars".  In fact that appears to parallel to what NASA is doing, sort of. 

And then I might further say "If I could do something on the Moon, perhaps I could leverage that to help asteroid mining, and a trip to Mars."

Apes on the Moon:
http://www.cnn.com/2015/04/30/tech/mci-robochimp/
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/ … -MOON.html
NASA Robosimian:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3HFXO_qx5ZY
Driving a Car?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3HFXO_qx5ZY

I am going to double post this to another thread with additional comments as you will see.

So, I presume that the local topic can be restated as "How come we can't sell a trip to Mars to the US public?"

Logically you need the public consent to get a real politicians attention.

So, a movie "Pacific Rim" tends to be ridiculous.  But it is understandable by little boys.  Why wouldn't you build giant robots so that you could punch cross dimensional monsters that look like Godzilla?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacific_Rim_(film)

Well, thankfully all of your potential customers are not little boys, but you need to sell to little boys anyway as well.

Lot's of rigid thinking around here.
For instance you are mostly caught in the "Mars Roach Motel".

That's the one where scientists co-opted the NASA budget to focus on unmanned missions.  (And it was right to do so as it turns out).

However, a robot that drills in rocks at a feet per day rate is not nearly as exciting as punching Godzilla with a giant robot.

My point being that I have also repeatedly worked with introducing a proposed "Ballistic" method of injection into Mars orbit, and the only one who even ever acknowledged it is GW.  Are you all so afraid of offending the Hohmann transfer gods, or do I just smell exceptionally strange?

You are rigid.  Even Mr. Bolden now acknowledges that NASA is not doing a "The Moon is off limits".

I guess the point being that Mars is an exceptional case,  it is a long time off, yet it saps the energy that could be used to do the asteroids and Moon, and the irony is that there is a good chance that if you did the asteroids and Moon, they would make a "REAL" plan to go to Mars, much more viable.

And in the mean time with robots on the Moon, you just might capture some imagination, since the time delay is ~3 seconds, and solar energy to drive them would be 2x as powerful, and the Moon is an object you can see in the sky very plainly as unique.

Mars, might be settled, but a bird in the hand is other objects for now.  That should come at no reduction in what NASA and others are doing for Mars.

I see a patchwork of a Fossilized plan for Mars and a mostly disconnected set of concepts for other objects, but no master plan, or if a master plan, a rather impractical one.

So, now I will wait and see if someone will do a "Topper" move on this.  That's always fun.  It helps you keep so many active members here.

Last edited by Void (2015-10-18 15:21:50)

---

End

Terraformer

Member

From: The Fortunate Isles

Registered: 2007-08-27

Posts: 3,906

Website

Re: US public opposed to spending money on human Mars missions

I'm very much in favour of Luna first, because I think the return on investment is much quicker. There are options for tourism, fuel production, and mining there; the craft can be much lighter, because they're not spending months in transit; a much more rapid evacuation can be done at any time, so if one of your colonists gets ill you can send them back to Terra for treatment; the much lower lag allows increased use of telerobotics and assistance from Terra...

My... plan, if you will, is to get a Lunar colony established before the first manned Mars mission, so that we can build (most of) it and fuel it from Lunar, vastly reducing the cost. Yes, it's Battlestar Galactica. But if we can bootstrap our way to that point, we don't need to pour in 100s of $billions to get there.

Hmmm, I wonder if a Lunar colony could make money building satellites, only importing a few components they can't make themselves?

---

Use what is abundant and build to last

Void

Member

Registered: 2011-12-29

Posts: 7,814

Re: US public opposed to spending money on human Mars missions

So, venturing a bit further;

Again;
Apes on the Moon:
http://www.cnn.com/2015/04/30/tech/mci-robochimp/
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/ … N.htmlNASA Robosimian:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3HFXO_qx5ZY
Driving a Car?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PBsfJZ-Gixc
http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news.php?feature=4617

So, do you want connection to the future of such potential machines, where people on Earth might "Look" at the surface of the Moon, and might participate in guiding such machines, to build useful and perhaps even profitable industrial capacity on the Moon, or do you want to continue your practice of maintaining a narrow view of the process of accessing Mars, which I believe is possibly outdated.

In fact those machines could be a method of employment for some of the future generations, where they might at first run them remotely from the surface of the Earth, and later, from "Shell  Worlds/ Space Stations" closer to the Moon.  Politicians understand voters and JOBS!

And if you are thinking of riding me out on a rail, just remember, "I am the Mostest on the Topic!".

I am being rather polite actually, under the circumstances.

Last edited by Void (2015-10-18 15:22:25)

---

End

Void

Member

Registered: 2011-12-29

Posts: 7,814

Re: US public opposed to spending money on human Mars missions

We are on similar pages Teraformer, you said:

I'm very much in favour of Luna first, because I think the return on investment is much quicker. There are options for tourism, fuel production, and mining there; the craft can be much lighter, because they're not spending months in transit; a much more rapid evacuation can be done at any time, so if one of your colonists gets ill you can send them back to Terra for treatment; the much lower lag allows increased use of telerobotics and assistance from Terra...

My... plan, if you will, is to get a Lunar colony established before the first manned Mars mission, so that we can build (most of) it and fuel it from Lunar, vastly reducing the cost. Yes, it's Battlestar Galactica. But if we can bootstrap our way to that point, we don't need to pour in 100s of $billions to get there.

Hmmm, I wonder if a Lunar colony could make money building satellites, only importing a few components they can't make themselves?

I agree.  I am afraid of the Mars "Roach Motel" outcome.  I am a plan A + option B + option C kind of person.  Don't let them get you into a cul-de-sack.

If Mars only, then I am afraid of
1) Barriers due to biological claims.
2) A dance and prance around a flag.  I have visions of each nations Cosmo/Asto person kicking the other one in the pants in a circle while circling and changing flags.  Then they all get into their spaceship, and fly home and crash into the sun.
Something stupid engineered by a mob of nutcases (Not thinking of you Spacenut) anyway.

If you go from the bottom up Moon/Asteroids/Mars, (Some exchange in position allowed), instead of the commando to Mars scheme, you have many more shots at it.  The Commando to Mars scheme can be sabotaged too easily by those who want to co-opt the funds, or simply don't want such a mission to work.

Last edited by Void (2015-10-18 15:29:49)

---

End

Void

Member

Registered: 2011-12-29

Posts: 7,814

Re: US public opposed to spending money on human Mars missions

Forgive a bit of wandering off of topic, but when I see those "Monkey Robot Actuators" I am thinking "Flywheel".

https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=Flywhee

Moving from sunshine to shadow, frequently would be normal for many situations on the Moon, and perhaps a flywheel would store "Sprinting" energy for the shadows.  Of course "Sprinting" in that situation is stupid, since the robots do not have to outrun Lions, Tigers, and Bears, and rocks and dirt can't run away very well, but I think you understand.

Flywheels would give both good and bad Gyroscopic effects I believe, so good engineering is desired.

Good: Energy Storage, stand up like a bicycle or segway?

Bad: Bangs itself to pieces?

---

End

SpaceNut

Administrator

From: New Hampshire

Registered: 2004-07-22

Posts: 29,431

Re: US public opposed to spending money on human Mars missions

The topic limits that would be nice but the typical control of the topic is relative to the first post that it opens by but moderators do try to keep things in check when its does become an issue.

As part of the general public that feels that investing in space is a must to push technological materials and processes I also feel that the corporate world needs to catch up and start investing as well to make it work for all man kind to be able to do the same by gaining the ability to afford to be part of the new frontier.

I am just a Space Nut and I can see how it can benefit man if we can get the costs down....all plans are on the table....my fear is that Nasa will go to the moon and then will stop, go to an asteriod then will not do another and finally man will land on mars but never to go again. With each start and stop the cost will go up and Nasa will claim to not have the money as the corporate world will still be behind not willing to invest in the infrasture to make it so that man can still keep going.

Should space exploration be a priority for federal funding?

Space policy responsiveness: The relationship between public opinion and NASA funding

Void

Member

Registered: 2011-12-29

Posts: 7,814

Re: US public opposed to spending money on human Mars missions

Oh, I don't mind if you have a favorite concept.

However, if they are doing Monkeyshines on the Moon, you might as well show them a shopping list, and see if they have anything you can afford to buy, any good deals.

---

End

SpaceNut

Administrator

From: New Hampshire

Registered: 2004-07-22

Posts: 29,431

Re: US public opposed to spending money on human Mars missions

Watkins: Support of space exploration is a must if NASA - and US - are to succeed

Mars_B4_Moon

Member

Registered: 2006-03-23

Posts: 9,776

Re: US public opposed to spending money on human Mars missions

Senate budget committee tells NASA to select two developers for lunar lander program

https://news.yahoo.com/senate-budget-co … 05846.html

Private Sector Joins NASA in Funding Astrobiology Research

http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewsr.html?pid=55215

Last edited by Mars_B4_Moon (2021-10-19 10:54:49)